Maya Forstater talks to Andrew Gold for Heretics

[RethinkingLife]

As excellent and clear as you'd expect.

I was at Maya's first public speaking event shortly after all of the brouhaha started. I can't express how much I admire the authority and confidence she's gained as a public speaker and as a fluent and responsive interviewee.

Watched this earlier, it was a good way to spend a hour!

I notice it says '2 genders' when I suspect it'll turn out to be sex.

Gold has swapped out the image and strapline several times. It's now showing JKR - when I posted last night, it was Maya and different text.

Thanks for posting that link OP 👍

Thankfully Andrew changed the awful screencap he used for his interview with Helen Joyce (it was very unflattering). It looks like Maya’s fared slightly better but, as with the picture of Helen, an action shot is not always best at conveying an interviewee's personality.

Andrew gold is quite fascinating in himself - I think a very short time ago he was much more sympathetic to a minority group frequently called the most vulnerable and marginalised in society. It was obviously not a subject he was particularly interested in, as it didn't effect him particularly.

It took just a few chats with people such as Helen Joyce, Richard Dawkins and now maya and he's obviously 100% behind the terven.

Even as a journalist and documentary film maker, he just wasn't aware of the issues we were trying to raise. This must show how aggressively and successfully they have been repressed. And as soon as an intelligent, calm conversation is allowed to take place it really makes sense.

He has had quite a few interactions with Katy montgomerie on twitter and invited Katy onto his podcast to give an opposing view. But Katy is being very elusive.

I know what you mean Rabbit, he was very much focused on cults and not much else until very recently.

He has mentioned in a few of his recent interviews that he doesn’t like sex based stereotypes because he feels he doesn’t conform to them and not conforming doesn’t make him any less of a man. He also mentioned Richard Dawkins as a huge influence on his thinking, and Dawkins is tackling the issue of sex vs gender identity. And, having investigated cults heavily, he sees the cult-like aspects of TRAs.

Andrew is better informed after each Heretic interview and the series is a fascinating timeline of going from asking some basic questions to full peaking. I also like the vibe that his interviews have of being 'The Man on the Clapham Omnibus' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus) in that he asks what what other people would like to know.

I’ve enjoyed both interviews with Helen and Maya. Let’s hope he does some more with other GCers.

With so many people in real life I really think if they spent just an hour listening to helen Joyce lay out the main issues, perhaps then a bit of az hakeem explaining the physiciatry behind a trans identity, David Bell explaining the problems with the Tavistock, throw in some Susie Green for balance, then maybe some time looking at how women with concerns have been treated like Rachel meade, it would all collapse.

The genius part of this was portraying these people as racist, fascist, homophobic, incompetent, ignorant bigots, I guess.

I've just searched for this thread because I have listened to Gold's (latest?) podcast where he describes being criticized by "right-wing" mumsnet. I was rather surprised as I have always found the feminism to be predominantly left-wing here. It made me question whether he's really understood what's going on, tbh.

Which one? Iain McGilchrist? Can you recall whereabouts in the podcast?

I listened to one he did the Saturday before.

Jon Ronson was to provide a recommendation quote on golds new book, but withdraw because gold did not challenging various guests enough (i think he mentioned maya and helen, but i cant remember exactly). But they are still friendly and talked about working together in the future.

Gold also talked about the pressure to put click baity titles on youtube vids that dont necessarily reflect his opinion.

Gold noticed that a lot of GC are right wing and talked about self styled ultra GC being caught up in purity spirals. He mentioned talking to someone, i didnt recognise the mans name, who agreed with him.

It made me laugh because he made out he's been investigating this phenomenon over time, when he didnt seem to know that 'ultra' is a piss take of something that was said a couple of weeks before. He's definitely using 'right wing' as a insult, because it means nothing in this context, and anyone who looks into it for more than 5 minutes knows this.

I think Gold is a bit GC, wanted to get a bit of the Triggernometry audience, but got scared off when he saw mainstream opportunities disappearing.

Found it!
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3Gl1BTiovN2UiXMCeSJAz0?si=W_xFtUjxSX6hfl6ZUaJBsg&t=3607

Ive just seen that Andrew Gold is going to be a speaker at a genspect conference in sept.

Might explain his opinion about 'ultra' GC.

Yes. He dunked on KJKeen and said he should have challenged her more when she said she was plain speaking. He made it sound like we were all ultra conservatives and obsessive about language. It was very annoying yet again (blooming Eric Weinstein did this too) to be treated like us wanting to maintain the current science, data and safeguarding based system was somehow crazy and only he can be objective and be fair to both sides.

And this recent cat killer prison debacle has proven yet again that words matter, descriptions matter, categories matter, legal definitions matter, objective journalism matters. Hurt feelings and politeness should be waaaaay down the list.

I think Gold is a bit GC, wanted to get a bit of the Triggernometry audience, but got scared off when he saw mainstream opportunities disappearing

Yes, I think you're spot on. That's the episode I was referring to, not the latest one!

And how swiftly it's swifted from being a hyperbolic marker to being interpreted as a far right categorisation.

Some of these people need to give their heads the 'Mumsnet recommends' wobble.

Useful piece on labelling people extremists. As ever with the Guardian, women are not allowed to be "pro-woman" but have to be framed as anti-[X].

The rightwing Tory MP Miriam Cates and Lord Frost, the high-profile rightwing peer, are among those who have expressed opposition amid concerns that the move could have an inadvertent impact on anti-abortion groups, advocates for socially conservative causes and those opposed to transgender rights.
“Any attempt to define extremism or fundamental British values is very risky because one person’s extremism is another person’s sincerely held and lawful belief,” Cates told the Guardian.
“An obvious is example is where I regularly call trans rights activists extremists for believing a man can be a woman just because he says he is, and that this gives him the right to enter women-only spaces, but equally I am called an extremist for believing there are only two biological sexes and that you can’t change sex.”
“These are debates that we should be able to have lawfully in society. We should be able to call each other extremists, but it also means those views should not be banned,” said the MP, one of the leaders of the New Conservative grouping of Tory MPs.
In a move that also raises the prospect of unusual alliances emerging between those who might disagree on other issues but who are united by hostility to the proposals, Cates said she would be raising her concerns with the government and other MPs.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/05/senior-tories-criticise-no-10-plans-to-broaden-extremism-definition